[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: to bump or not to bump



On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:27:18PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> Hello
>
>
>    I would like to hear some more opinions on the subject described in  
> the thread started by  
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481601#c6. My opinion is  
> expressed in comment #9 and I am quite sure that any future update of  
> the rawhide version might introduce the exact same problem again. I  
> could, of course, keep using always the same release tag as in the  
> corresponding rawhide version, but it looks a bit odd to me. Are there  
> any guidelines on the subject of the correspondence of  release numbers  
> between epel and rawhide ?

First, I think that the exact same guidelines should apply to fedora
rawhide versus fedora releases.

Then I think that it is better to sync releases when this really 
corresponds with the same package (same version, same functionality), 
and helps versionned requires. However, I don't think that bumps and 
builds should be done only for that. In the case at hand, the build
should still be in epel testing, so a bump and a rebuild would
do no harm and help requires, so I think it is fine to do it -- at
least when there is a known case where it helps requires.

In the end I don't think that this should be a guideline, more something 
that is left to the packager. So if you think that it is pointless to
try to sync with the rawhide releases, you shouldn't do the bump and 
rebuild.

--
Pat


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]